09.21.21 Senate Minutes

Establish a Quorum

• A quorum was established when 59 senators responded to the quorum poll via canvas. In all, 79 senators attended the meeting.

• Approval of the minutes from the Senate Meeting of August 31, 2021:

  • Luca Guazotto (senator, Physics) pointed out an error in the minutes for August 31. Beside this, no objections or corrections were raised to the June minutes. The minutes, with an erroneous “better” removed, were accepted by unanimous consent

Remarks and Announcements

University Senate Chair: Todd Steury

• Chair Steury then brought the Senate up to date with what the Executive had been doing since Senate last met.

• He noted that he and immediate past chair Don Mulvaney had been involved in the Presidential Advisory Search Committee. He noted that the committee was running listening sessions and encouraged faculty to participate. Feedback can also be sent to the advisory committee and search firm via email, and the Presidential Advisory Search Committee has also set up a website which they intend to use to provide updates.

• The Senate executive and the Steering Committee has worked to change voting procedures.  Since the last Senate meeting, the Chair has also worked with the executive and Steering Committee to send out specific charges to Senate Committees.

• Chair Steury then invited President Jay Gogue to make remarks 

President: Jay Gogue

• President Gogue noted the recent death of Dr. Harold Franklin, Auburn’s first African-American student. He acknowledged that the university had not acted well towards Franklin when he was a student at Auburn in the 1960s as well as recent faculty efforts to repair this.

• He thanked the university’s financial aid administration, and in particular Kelli Shomaker (Vice President for Business & Finance and CFO) and her staff, who successfully distributed 20.5 million dollars in student need-based aid in about two weeks. About 10,000 students received some additional funding. In the last couple of semesters, the university has been able to give out over 36 million dollars in need-based aid.

• President Gogue then went on to update Senate on the Board of Trustees meeting during the previous week.  All items on the Board of Trustees agenda were approved, including the creation of a new Bachelor of Sciences degree in Food Sciences and a doctoral degree in Physical Therapy, and several certificate programs.  The Board also approved the purchase of a lot at the corner of S. College and Woodfield Drive, an item added to the agenda a couple of days before the meeting.

• The Board of Trustees also approved the budget, about 1.5 billion dollars for the year starting October 1, 2021. It is the largest budget the university has ever had. The Board also approved a 3% merit raise for campus.

• Dr. Gogue invited Bill Hardgrave, Auburn University Provost, to give remarks on academic issues, but the Provost was not present as he was in transit to Birmingham to attend a student recruiting forum.

• The President then called on Dr. Fred Kam for a medical update. Dr. Kam informed Senate that covid-19 cases seemed to have peaked in early to mid September.  Hospitalizations in the East Alabama Medical Center are significantly down. He reported zero students in isolation in campus and zero in quarantine on campus. There was no perceptible increase in cases after the Labor Day holiday or the first home football game on campus.  The testing backlog has dissipated on campus. There continue to be covid-19 cases on campus, but this is probably the new normal. He believes vaccination efforts have paid off and his clinic continues to give vaccination doses to 30-50 individuals each day. There are over 7000 students registered for the incentive scheme. If and when booster shots are introduced, they will look to administer those doses through the Harrison School of Pharmacy.

• After Dr. Kam completed his update, President Gogue concluded his remarks.

• Chair Steury asked for clarification on boosters.  Fred Kam confirmed that, following current FDA and CDC guidelines, third doses, while approved, are currently not available to everyone.

• Steury then invited questions for Dr. Kam or Dr. Gogue. While waiting for questions, he noted that immediate past Chair, Don Mulvaney, had represented faculty in the Board of Trustees meeting referenced by President Gogue.

• Questions:

  • Question: Duha Altindag (not a senator, Economics) asked President Gogue why rules issued by the Office of the Provost in advance of the start of the semester in fall 2020 setting a strict deadline for finalizing instructional modalities, did not seem to have been applied to a class taught by the President himself that semester. His course continued to be listed as “face to face” although the President taught it in a blended format. He asked if this was an example of Presidential privilege. He further complained that he, as a faculty member, had course modalities imposed on him by the Provost, his Dean, and his Department Chair and has not been consulted on how classes he teaches within his department are taught. He asked how he could go about changing the modality used for his classes.

    • President Gogue replied he did not know how his class was listed but it was taught with a combination of live classes and lectures on zoom.  The President noted that faculty currently, with approval from department heads and chairs, dean, and the provost, can use whatever modality they wish.  Dr. Altindag sought repeatedly to re-ask his question about President Gogue’s course listing, but the President had already provided his answer.

    • Chair Steury noted that the Senate Chair and the Provost had sent out an email in advance of the current semester stressing that faculty were free to shift to a blended modality this semester with permission from department chair/heads and deans.

  • Hans-Werner van Wyk (senator, Mathematics and Statistics) asked what the current estimate of people vaccinated on campus is, and if there has been discussion about mandating vaccinations on campus.

    • Dr. Fred Kam responded noting that Alabama state law prevents the university from mandating vaccines and that any effort to deliberately break that law would end up being tied up in the courts. Breaking the law is not an option.  State law also prevents the university from collecting data on vaccination rates, but over 7000 students have declared that they have been vaccinated by signing up for the incentive program. Over 16,000 vaccine doses have been given on campus. Above 80% of Auburn employees on the university BCBS insurance policy have been vaccinated. Over 65% of spouses have been vaccinated, and over 35% of dependents aged 12-26.  This is much better than the state’s vaccination rate, which is just above 40%.

  • Richard Seals (not a senator, Economics) asked the Senate Chair Todd Steury about his decision to cut off Michael Stern (not a senator, Economics) in the last Senate meeting for having passed the standard time limit for questions of 10 minutes. He said that he had watched the video recording of the last Senate meeting and Stern did not get a full 10 minutes.  Seals queried the accuracy of Steury’s timekeeping and asked if Steury believed his duty as chair was to censor the speech of faculty.

    • Seals further asserted that Stern was about to ask a question which Seals claimed a lot of people were interested in. Stern did not have the opportunity to start to ask his question because he was shut down. Seals asked whether someone told Steury to shut down the question which Stern had been about to ask.

    • In response, Chair Steury noted it was entirely his own decision to cut off Stern. It is his duty as chair was to make sure that the meeting moved along. Decisions made by him as chair could be appealed. 

    • Seals encouraged Steury to carefully time speakers in future. Steury responded that he would continue to make decisions which prioritized getting through the Senate agenda. Seals welcomed Steury’s commitment to strictly maintaining the rules he set forth.

Action Items

Voting on Nominees to serve on Senate Committees

Presenter: Ralph Kingston, Senate Secretary

• Ralph Kingston presented the name of a nominee selected by the Rules Committee to serve in an open position on the Retention committee.

• VOTE RESULTS:   63 total in favor, 2 opposed, 0 abstaining. The nominee was approved.

Voting on Faculty Handbook addition on Classroom Policy (Chapter 4, Section 2)

Chair Steury noted that this policy was presented as a pending action item by Kamden Strunk, chair of the Faculty Handbook Review Committee, at the last Senate meeting. The detail of the change was shared on screen.

• Hank Murrah (not a senator, Educational Foundations, Leadership, and Technology) asked about the final sentence of the policy, and whether the power of chairs/heads, the dean, and the provost, to approve visitors to the classroom for purposes related to the instructional mission of the university might potentially violate academic freedom.

• Kamden Strunk (Chair, Faculty Handbook Review Committee) replied that there was no previous official policy on who could come into instructors’ classrooms, and this policy sought primarily to codify existing practice. The sentence in question is related to legimate instructional mission and academic needs like accreditation site visits and peer evaluation of teaching. This would still require advance notice to the instructor, and the instructor would be able to appeal if the purpose was not legitimate.

• Hank Murrah noted he was particularly concerned that this might allow administrators to evaluate an individual’s teaching practice on the basis of whether it fulfilled the university mission. Kamden Strunk noted that administrators could perform such evaluations and could do so regardless as to whether this policy was in the handbook.

• Ralph Kingston (Senate Secretary) responded noting that there were other policies in the handbook limiting how administrators and others might review faculty and pursue issues they might have with an individual’s classroom practice.

• VOTE RESULTS:  53 total in favor, 5 opposed, 4 abstained. The addition to the handbook passed.

Voting on Changes to Senate Meeting Rules re: voting procedure

Presenter: Todd Steury, Chair

• Steury noted that the Rules for meetings passed in the 31 August meeting specified that Qualtrics be used for voting but this had not worked as well as hoped.  The change to the policy is to replace “using Qualtrics” with “using an online app or survey/voting software.”

• Michael Stern (not a senator, Economics) asked what would be done if someone asked for a division on a vote according to Roberts Rules.  This involves a visual separation of voters in the room. Stern asked how this might be achieved on zoom. He questioned whether or not the challenge of using Robert’s Rules of Order on zoom had been fully thought out.

• Chair Steury noted that Robert’s Rules are complex. There may be issues with translating Robert’s Rules for use on zoom. When issues come up, the Senate body can determine how to apply the rules.

• Luca Guazzotto (senator, Physics) noted that it might be useful for there to be a minimum notice period for any change in voting system. He made a motion to amend the policy to require that any change to the method by which voting is conducted must be announced at the same time as meeting agenda.  The amendment was seconded by Cheryl Seals (Steering Committee). 

• Discussion of amendment –

  • David Han (senator, Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences) asked whether or not a member of the Senate could still request a different voting method (such as a roll call) at any point during a meeting.  Steury confirmed this was possible.

  • David Mixson (senator, University Outreach) asked to amend the amendment adding the requirement that all senators should be given access to the method of voting at the time that that voting method is announced. This was seconded Hans-Werner van Wyk (senator, Mathematics and Statistics).

• Discussion of amendment to the amendment – none.

• Vote on amendment to the amendment to additionally require that “senators be given access to the voting medium at the time that the voting medium will be announced.”

  • VOTE RESULTS:   51 total in favor, 8 opposed, 6 abstained. Amendment to amendment passed.

• Discussion of amendment – There was no further discussion of the amendment.

• VOTE on motion to amend the proposed Rules to require that “the medium of voting will be announced with the Senate agenda and that senators will be given access to the voting medium at that time.”

  • VOTE RESULTS: 56 total in favor, 4 opposed, 2 abstained.  Amendment passed.

• Discussion of main motion -- There was no further discussion on the main motion.

• VOTE on the main motion (Changes to Senate Meeting Rules re: voting procedure), as amended.

  • VOTE RESULTS: 54 total in favor, 0 opposed, 3 abstained. Motion passed.

Pending Action Items

Changes to the Faculty Handbook; re: post-tenure review

Presenter: Mitchell Brown, member, Faculty Handbook Review Committee, and member, Post-Tenure Review committee.

• Mitchell Brownbegan by noting that this policy came out of a request from the Post-Tenure Review committee to the Faculty Handbook Review Committee to clarify and improve several aspects of the rules and the process.  This has included moving the last date of notification for faculty members; including 6 years of annual reviews to the materials sent to the PTR committee; including a departmental letter from the department faculty providing rationale for their vote in the material sent to PTR, (also providing that latter to the faculty member involved); and clarification on what happens if the faculty members fails to successfully complete the initial 12-month development plan; and clarifying the appeals process for PTR decisions.

• Roy Hartfield (senator, Aerospace Engineering)> noted that the original purpose of the policy as discussed in the senate twelve years ago was to help faculty improve. His experience of the process since, however, was that it was quite negative. He cited the example of a former chair who, with the support of a former dean, gave two unacceptable Faculty Annual Reviews in a row to a faculty member with the apparent intent of putting that faculty member on PTR. He asked if the operation of the PTR process to date might be audited. He asked if the operation of the PTR process to date might be audited. He asked if the operation of the PTR process to date might be audited. He also noted that it would be nice to know how Faculty Annual Reviews are audited by the university, as required by the Faculty Handbook. To his knowledge they have not been audited.

• Hartfield made a motion that a Senate committee review the PTR process – what has happened in the past and what the results of PTR have been – and that the administration should suspend PTR processes until this review is completed.

• This motion was seconded by Scott Ketring (senator, HDFS). It will be added to the agenda of the next Senate meeting as an action item.

• Questions:

  • Sabit Adanur (senator, Mechanical Engineering) asked about dismissal as an outcome of PTR. Kamden Strunk (Chair, Faculty Handbook Review Committee) noted that the PTR committee did not have the power to recommend dismissal. Dismissal cases go to the Faculty dismissal committee. This is a separate process.

    • Roy Hartfield (senator, Aerospace Engineering)noted that he was concerned about whether the policy was working to do what it was supposed to do in practice.

  • Michael Stern (not a senator, Economics)asked whether this was a change to the Senate Constitution or the Faculty Handbook. Steury confirmed that the revision to the PTR committee was a handbook change and not a constitutional change and it would only require a majority vote and not a vote of 2/3s of senators in the next meeting.

    • Stern then asked about an earlier set of revisions to Promotion and Tenure procedures passed by Senate, and why these changes have not yet been taken a Board of Trustees meeting.  He questioned why we would vote on new handbook changes if old changes have not been submitted to the Board. 

    • Chair Steury said that it was likely that the changes to P&T which were submitted at the same time as changes to Student Evaluations of Teaching have not been brought up because trustees have had some concerns with the SETs. The Executive committee has asked to meet with members of the Board of Trustees in order to work out why they have been held up.

Changes to the Faculty Handbook; re: removal of Lectures Committee

Presenter: Todd Steury, Senate Chair; Kamden Strunk, Chair – Faculty Review Handbook Committee

• Chair Steury explained that this committee had not met since 2019 and is essentially without a function. Senate has still had to appoint members to the committee regardless.

• This is a change to the Senate Constitution and will require a 2/3s vote of senators to approve in the next meeting.

Changes to the Faculty Handbook - re: distance meetings via zoom

Chair Steury introduced the changes to allow the use of zoom for University Faculty meetings and for University Senate meetings.  He noted that a significant part of the change was also that it allowed senate committees to meet electronically.

• Steury clarified that the changes proposed are constitutional changes – one to the University Faculty Constitution and the other to the Senate Constitution. He noted that these would be voted on separately.

• Karley Riffe (senator, Education Foundations, Leadership, and Technology) asked if this change might reverse the vote in the last Senate meeting that Senate meetings would continue on zoom and be reviewed in January.

• Steury replied that, if these constitutional changes passed, he did not foresee that the Steering Committee would alter the decision made by Senate. Allowing the Senate Steering Committee the power to determine whether meetings are in person or on zoom is meant to allow for changes in response to emergency circumstances.

• Michael Stern (not a senator, Economics) asked how the proposed constitutional changes here related to Steury’s assertion in the last senate meeting that the Rules for Senate meetings did not require a constitutional change. Steury said that the point he was making in the last senate meeting was that the Rules for how Senate would meet virtually did not need to be specified in the Constitution.

• Stern noted that, if a constitutional change is needed to authorize zoom meetings, then the Senate could not vote to have a zoom meeting. Steury noted in response that the decision to meet virtually occurred in response to an emergency situation. The constitutional change is required if senate committees or the Senate wishes to continue meeting virtually when the emergency situation is concluded.  

• Stern asked how the Senate constitution is suspended in emergency situations. Steury noted that deciding to meet virtually is not suspending the constitution. Stern asked if a Senate parliamentarian had been appointed. Steury replied that he had not been able to find a faculty member to serve in the role. Stern accused the Senate of conducting its affairs in a lawless manner. Steury noted that his decisions could be appealed. Stern noted that he, as a non-senator, did not enjoy the right to appeal. Steury agreed on this point. 

Information Items

Presentation from Faculty Athletics Representative

Presenter: Beverly Marshall, Chair of the Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics

• Beverly Marshall presented on the work of the Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics, and in particular the results of its monitoring of student academic progress and graduation rates. In addition, she noted the rules on impermissible extra benefits: there can be no special accommodations made for athletes that are not offered and would not be offered to other students. Making accommodations for students travelling for university sponsored events is not an extra benefit. Name, image, and likeness (NIL) appearances are not university excused absences, however. The Faculty Athletic Representative follows up on any grade changes involving student athletes in order to make sure the rules on impermissible extra benefits have been followed.

• She also noted that faculty should not sell their discounted tickets to athletics events.

New Business

• Sunny Stalter-Pace (senator, English) noted ongoing concerns about students wearing masks. She informed Senate that she had learned the best way to target students in particularly areas is to contact the Office of Student Conduct. 

• Sabit Adanur (senator, Mechanical Engineering) noted that there were similar concerns among faculty in his department. Students were not wearing masks in Broun Hall, Lowder Hall, and the Gavin Engineering Research lab.

• Karley Riffe (senator, Educational Foundations, Leadership, and Technology) asked the Senate leadership to try to provide an online option for the University Faculty meeting. She also encouraged faculty to attend the Presidential Search Listening sessions

• Susan Youngblood (not a senator, English) noted that students were trying to get around masking rules by using exceptions for dining spaces.  Students say that they do not need to wear a mask as long as they had a drink adjacent to them.  She asked if there might be a policy defining dining areas for the purposes of masking.

• Chair Steury promised to discuss this with the university administration. He would look for clarification and for this to be communicated to students.

• Duha Altindag (not a senator, Economics) noted that students according to university policy had to be “actively” eating and drinking.  He noted that he had communicated on this issue to the administration, as well as to the Senate Chair, there has been no change in enforcement.

• Susan Youngblood (not a senator, English) noted the text of the masking policy specifies that masks could be removed in “indoor dining facilities when actively eating.”  Her question was not about “activity eating” but what counts as an “indoor dining facility”

• Ralph Kingston (Senate Secretary) noted that the Libraries dealt with the issue of masking last academic year by defining specific “dining areas” outside of which eating and drinking was not permitted.

Adjournment

Hearing no objections, Chair Steury declared the meeting adjourned at 5:17pm.

Attendance

Senate Officers

Administration

Ex-Officio Members

Senators by Department